Once the EU demand the £60 billion payment from the UK to cover the current 7 year budget cycle which still needs contributing to (ends in 2020) + the following few years after where spend is already allocated in the next EU budget cycle (2020-2027 but some schemes are already agreed in this cycle) + the EU Pensions pot contribution there will be no more money for the NHS in fact there will probably be even less*!

Indeed, it's all speculation, and only time will tell. I fear if it doesn't go well though, that Brexiteers will just keep rolling out that line of us benefiting "in the long term". It'll grow and grow and grow until it's, what, 2050 until our economy might start prospering from this new non-EU situation. By which time half of us our dead, your local beach is swimming in piss, millions more have died from poverty along the way, and those EU migrants doing the low paid jobs have just been replaced with Indians and Bangladeshis.

gutlessrhymeIndeed, it's all speculation, and only time will tell. I fear if it doesn't go well though, that Brexiteers will just keep rolling out that line of us benefiting "in the long term". It'll grow and grow and grow until it's, what, 2050 until our economy might start prospering from this new non-EU situation.

What do you think about the change will increase prosperity? Interested to know cos that'll help me understand why it'll take over 30 years.

gutlessrhymeIndeed, it's all speculation, and only time will tell. I fear if it doesn't go well though, that Brexiteers will just keep rolling out that line of us benefiting "in the long term". It'll grow and grow and grow until it's, what, 2050 until our economy might start prospering from this new non-EU situation.

What do you think about the change will increase prosperity? Interested to know cos that'll help me understand why it'll take over 30 years.

The eurozone and Britain and everywhere else above average are going to lose a greater share of global gdp because most growth is going to come from the developing world regardless of any other factors.

gutlessrhymeIndeed, it's all speculation, and only time will tell. I fear if it doesn't go well though, that Brexiteers will just keep rolling out that line of us benefiting "in the long term". It'll grow and grow and grow until it's, what, 2050 until our economy might start prospering from this new non-EU situation.

What do you think about the change will increase prosperity? Interested to know cos that'll help me understand why it'll take over 30 years.

- They assume a counterfactual scenario with a long term trend growth rate of 2.2% continuing. I'm not suggesting I have a better figure to use, but since growth amongst EU member states has gone from ~4% in 2000 to under 2% now I don't think this is a fully reliable starting point.

- It doesn't account for Trump, the impact of nationalism on EU politics etc. It assumes there is no trade imbalance/debt issue at the heart of the EU that risks its current growth rate of just under 2%. Of course it couldn't, too many factors and finger in the air guesses, but by not doing so it's hard to see how it can be accurate.

- The report estimates that by 2030, growth in terms of GDP per capita if we remained in the EU could be around 29%, while leaving would put us around 28%. That is an incredibly small difference, and because the study is based on many unknowns, for me that isn't a large enough margin of error to allow us to call it either way. (In the interest of honesty, they say it could be a -0.8% difference in their 'better case' scenario and a -2.7% difference in their 'worse case' scenario).

- The study states "the largest short-term impact on the economy is felt through the additional uncertainty that would result from a UK vote to leave". Or to paraphrase, "market confidence". If the major negative impact they were predicting was explicitly from certain financial mechanisms (e.g. tariffs), then I'd be more concerned. However what they're essentially saying is that the biggest factor could be something notoriously hard to predict, i.e. human sentiment. I guess that's why I'm interested to understand whether people are worried about specific things, or whether it's a general feeling of doom and gloom, since the forecasters seem to be saying that 'people getting worried' is the single biggest thing stopping it from working

- The original report suggests the negative impact by 2025 would be under 1% in the better case scenario. However, their revised outlook (http://www.pwc.co.uk/services/economics-policy/insights/uk-economic-outlook.html) states that "UK economic growth held up better than expected immediately after the Brexit vote...". The cynical might argue that the original modelling therefore had a slight 'anti-Brexit' bias, whereas the reality will be slightly more positive than predicted. It's probably just as much due to this sort of forecasting being very difficult and often quite unreliable.

wiseacreThe eurozone and Britain and everywhere else above average are going to lose a greater share of global gdp because most growth is going to come from the developing world regardless of any other factors.

Granted, but who will be in a better position to trade with those emerging markets? Britain or a protectionist Eurozone trading bloc?

wiseacreThe eurozone and Britain and everywhere else above average are going to lose a greater share of global gdp because most growth is going to come from the developing world regardless of any other factors.

Granted, but who will be in a better position to trade with those emerging markets? Britain or a protectionist Eurozone trading bloc?

I think they'd much rather trade with 27 countries in one hit than us on our own!

frizzydIf the EU demand the £60 billion payment from the UK to cover the current 7 year budget cycle which still needs contributing to (ends in 2020) + the following few years after where spend is already allocated in the next EU budget cycle (2020-2027 but some schemes are already agreed in this cycle) + the EU Pensions pot contribution there will be no more money for the NHS in fact there will probably be even less*!

SW14First that involves agreeing a trade deal with all of the 27 (including all of the individual and different state interests).

The common market is protectionist to encourage internal trade. As a nation that doesn't manufacture a huge amount and has a trade deficit, we could be far more nimble.

But without preferential access to the 500 million strong market on our doorstep that currently accounts for half our trade, to the detriment of the financial and other service industries that supply much of the income that plugs part of that balance of payments gap.